class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724
|
Post by class411 on Jan 26, 2016 15:29:02 GMT
It seems to be beloved by train companies, but who really likes it, and why?
You get inferior effective legroom, it's much harder to get out from the window seat, and you get a much more confined feeling because you head is so much closer to the back of the seat in front than it would be, even to another passenger, in a 'facing' seat.
Before the Electrostar was introduced (actually, many years before, when a replacement for the 4-CEP's was first mooted), they promised all facing seating, but when they appeared there was a mass of 'airline'. Even in the 'airline' carriages, they tend to have a few facing seats and it's instructive to note that these are invariably the first to be occupied.
Given that the mean pitch is the same between the two type (and hence there is no advantage of extra seats), why do the operators specify this seating when the vast majority of passengers clearly detest it?
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jan 26, 2016 15:46:22 GMT
I don't think that it is as universally detested as you think. A study which I read about suggested that ~1/3 of passengers prefer Airline seating, ~1/3 prefer facing seats, and the last ~1/3 didn't really care so I think that saying the vast majority of passengers detest it is a bit harsh.
The 2 main benefits of airline seating over airline seats that I can think of are: a) You don't have to play footsies with people in the other seats, especially if they are a stranger b) You have somewhere to stow luggage (underneath your seat/seat in front)
It has also got to be said that I don't really feel any more confined in an airline seat than a facing seat, nor do I find a problem with a lack of legroom.
|
|
|
Post by trt on Jan 26, 2016 16:01:42 GMT
As someone who finds it a strain on certain muscles holding my body still if my centre of gravity is not vertically above my feet, I detest some of the airline seats around. They rake backwards and are so close together that looking vertically from above you can't see a clear patch of carpet. When you stand up and have to wait for the passageway shuffle to make a space, you're completely skew-wiff. I try to bottom shuffle to the aisle seat and turn my knees 90° before standing up. Or head to my favourite seat, which I'm not going to tell anyone where it is in the train!
|
|
|
Post by theblackferret on Jan 26, 2016 16:04:42 GMT
I personally don't like them, unless I'm travelling alone, in which case you hope a teenage blonde is magnetically attracted to take the seat next to you though I find in practice these seats do fill up less quickly and you can complete even Plymouth to London or in reverse without gaining a neighbour. I suspect the reason they may be popular with train companies could be their unit cost to install/replace/clean etc. comes a darn site cheaper than the conventional seat does. They may also be more robust in terms of wear and tear.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724
|
Post by class411 on Jan 26, 2016 16:08:08 GMT
I don't think that it is as universally detested as you think. A study which I read about suggested that ~1/3 of passengers prefer Airline seating, ~1/3 prefer facing seats, and the last ~1/3 didn't really care so I think that saying the vast majority of passengers detest it is a bit harsh. I know that the train companies have made this claim in the past, but it is simply not credible. In my experience, it is almost universally the case that every set of facing seats will be occupied before people start using the airline. I notice this a lot at Victoria getting on, and and waiting for departure. It's also very apparent that when a facing set become vacant en-route, people will often move seats to occupy it, and if that does not happen, any getting on at the next station invariably make a bee-line. I have long(ish) legs and never have a problem with 'playing footsie'. There is plenty of width for two people to have their legs stretched out alongside each other without ever touching. Only if you have very short legs! With facing seats there is plenty of space between the seat backs - it never seems to be much used. Short people seem to be OK, but I actually have to sit with my legs angled so that my feet are in the aisle (unless I want my knees in my chest), and you can't do that for long without getting a severe crick. It's interesting that LU never seem to have foisted airline seating on underground passengers
|
|
|
Post by countryman on Jan 26, 2016 17:45:17 GMT
Is the reason because you can get more seats in? I don't like airline seats and I don't like travelling backwards. My wife booked us on Eurostar to Marseille, and booked rear facing seats. Couldn't move to front facing until Lyon Part Dieu. On the way back we managed to get new seats all the way.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jan 26, 2016 18:28:07 GMT
Given that the mean pitch is the same between the two type (and hence there is no advantage of extra seats), No it isn't - if you put seats face-to-face that close together the seat cushions would be almost touching each other. (As another commenter has put it, looking down on face to back seating you can't see the carpet, because one seat back is raked back over the floor space allocated to the feet of the person behind. With back to back seating there is a dead space (which may find limited use for rubbish bins, suitably sized luggage etc) between the seatbacks. With airline seating you are supposed to put your feet under the seat in front. But yes, I hate them - especially with high seat backs and unless you are next to a window it's like being in a coffin. And you can feel trapped by the person in the gangway seat. And there's nowhere to put your luggage, or for standing passengers to lean on. And with the normal seat pitch (designed for a person of average height, so too small for half the population) I have to sit sideways, so only the gangway seats are actually usable anyway. And the seatback in front is so close you can't even read a book comfortably, let alone read a newspaper or use a laptop. @class 411 "It's interesting that LU never seem to have foisted airline seating on underground passengers" Oh, but they didAlthough in general the extra time spent struggling in and out of them would have an adverse effect on dwell times. Indeed, the only reason they have transverse seating at all on Tube trains is soe there is somewhere to put the technical equipment - and one large box is better than two small ones!
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724
|
Post by class411 on Jan 26, 2016 19:27:38 GMT
Given that the mean pitch is the same between the two type (and hence there is no advantage of extra seats), No it isn't - if you put seats face-to-face that close together the seat cushions would be almost touching each other. (As another commenter has put it, looking down on face to back seating you can't see the carpet, because one seat back is raked back over the floor space allocated to the feet of the person behind. Well, I measured it on a Eurostar, and I can just about promise you it is. Confirmed by counting the number of seats in each type of carriage. Mind you, if my counting skills as as poor as my measuring skills when doing DIY, I wouldn't take that as gospel! Particularly as I had a dislocated spine at the time. I'll recheck this weekend as I can't find a source on-line. The legroom gain achieved by being able to 'overlap' legroom in facing seats and still being able to put your feet under the facing seat is what makes facing seating so beneficial in the legroom stakes. Another point worth making, of course, is that people with long legs suffer most with airline because their knees are too far forward to be able to get their feet any distance under the seat in front. Interesting. I said 'seem', because I obviously haven't travelled on every type of LU stock ever. There actually appears to be more legroom there than on an Electrostar! (No underseat space, of course.)
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jan 26, 2016 20:31:58 GMT
Is the reason because you can get more seats in? I don't like airline seats and I don't like travelling backwards. My wife booked us on Eurostar to Marseille, and booked rear facing seats. Couldn't move to front facing until Lyon Part Dieu. On the way back we managed to get new seats all the way. I cannot stand rear facing seats!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2016 21:01:51 GMT
In Australia, you're able to flip the direction of the row of seats. So if the seat is facing backwards, most people flip it around to face forward. It looks quite funny when you first see, especially as the Australian's are used to it.
Airline seats: Nice, especially with the storage space, but the thing I don't like about them is when the person in front of you decides to put it back, then there is not much table space and is hard to stand up. And it always seemed the happen to me and not other people!
|
|
|
Post by revupminster on Jan 26, 2016 21:08:57 GMT
The railway companies like them; Great Western HST, high density coaches have 84 seats with only two tables. The new hitachi HST.s will have 88 seats. It all depends on the seat heights. On cross country you do feel enclosed.
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Jan 26, 2016 21:32:44 GMT
Is the reason because you can get more seats in? I don't like airline seats and I don't like travelling backwards. My wife booked us on Eurostar to Marseille, and booked rear facing seats. Couldn't move to front facing until Lyon Part Dieu. On the way back we managed to get new seats all the way. I cannot stand rear facing seats! Good job you didn't bother auditioning for Captain Scarlet then.
|
|
|
Post by trt on Jan 27, 2016 0:43:16 GMT
Trams had the flip back bench seats. Some of them anyway.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jan 27, 2016 6:23:14 GMT
The first class saloons in some first generation dmus had such seats as well. These were the areas immediately behind the driver's cab. There were three rows of seats - the front row faced forward (looking through the glazed panel into the driver's cab) and so did the back row (which backed onto the bulkhead separating the saloon from the cross passage leading to the exterior doors. But the middle row was reversible, so they could all face the same way, or you could sit face to face with the back row.
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Jan 27, 2016 9:49:20 GMT
Bus seating on trains. An economic benefit to the operator palmed off on the punters as 'modern', and 'an improvement'. Sad thing is, the punters start to believe it. "I love hanging on a strap. Much better than those awful old-fashioned seats". Guess who pays the dividends?
|
|
|
Post by trt on Jan 27, 2016 14:50:36 GMT
The first class saloons in some first generation dmus had such seats as well. These were the areas immediately behind the driver's cab. There were three rows of seats - the front row faced forward (looking through the glazed panel into the driver's cab) and so did the back row (which backed onto the bulkhead separating the saloon from the cross passage leading to the exterior doors. But the middle row was reversible, so they could all face the same way, or you could sit face to face with the back row. Oh yes! So they did! Thanks for reminding me. I remember riding these as a little boy in the GMPTE area.
|
|
|
Post by djlynch on Feb 24, 2016 2:23:44 GMT
For me, it depends on how full the train is. I am rather long of leg and broad of shoulder, not to mention quite round around the middle, and I have ended up very self-conscious about how much room I take up in crowded spaces. Airline style seats are nice for knowing exactly where my space ends and my neighbour's begins. On a mostly empty train, I will happily sprawl out over the extra legroom offered by bay or transverse seating and possibly the adjacent empty seat.
|
|
|
Post by melikepie on Feb 24, 2016 2:34:29 GMT
Can you imagine having longitudinal seating on an intercity?
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Feb 24, 2016 15:05:47 GMT
Can you imagine having longitudinal seating on an intercity? Don't give them ideas!
|
|
|
Post by ducatisti on Feb 24, 2016 16:08:06 GMT
me
If I'm on a train, I'm usually on my own, and I prefer the privacy. also, on pendolinos, I'd say it's easier to get out of the airline seats than the table seats.
also - ask yourself - do you prefer airline seats, or a geater change of having to stand
|
|
|
Post by wimblephil on Feb 24, 2016 21:11:44 GMT
I guess I'm one of the few, but personally I prefer them. I hate facing seats unless you're with a friend. It's just awkward to sit opposite somebody you don't know exchanging awkward glances!
I'm fairly short, so can't really speak about any lack of leg room or whatever. And yes, it can be awkward getting out of a window seat if somebody is next to you, but it can be just as difficult trying to scramble out between knees in a facing seats situation, particularly those with a 3+2 arrangement!
When on Southern's Class 377's my personal aim is to nab a forward facing, airline style, priority seat in the driving coach! (depending on the time of day and how full the train is likely to be!)
When it comes to the tube, I prefer longitudinal. For main line, fairy distant journey's though, I agree they're not so great!
|
|